It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
LOL now I see why he wanted an ignore feature.
I wonder why people are against me wanting to end what's started ...
Should i just ignore to reply to others' posts?
I do not understand
Post edited June 01, 2011 by iamin7ove
Nah responding is ok, it just seems you disreguard everything people say and keep using the same argument over and over even when it apears others have made valid points. the quote system this forum uses does not help, it's easy to miss who is saying what.
Post edited June 01, 2011 by Fat_old_guy
avatar
Fat_old_guy: Nah responding is ok, it just seems you disreguard everything people say and keep using the same argument over and over even when it apears others have made valid points. the quote system this forum uses does not help, it's easy to miss who is saying what.
How cant i not repeat myself when more than 3 people aim at my arguments >_>
avatar
Fat_old_guy: Nah responding is ok, it just seems you disreguard everything people say and keep using the same argument over and over even when it apears others have made valid points. the quote system this forum uses does not help, it's easy to miss who is saying what.
avatar
iamin7ove: How cant i not repeat myself when more than 3 people aim at my arguments >_>
Seems one again you disreguard what was said, did you miss the part where I said other people made valid points? Normal behaviour is to acknowledge the points that were valid, and adjust your agument based on the new info.
Man I hate the quote system here wish it put the quotes in a box making it easier to see when it's a different poster speaking.
Post edited June 01, 2011 by Fat_old_guy
avatar
Fat_old_guy: Seems one again you disreguard what was said, did you miss the part where I said other people made valid points? Normal behaviour is to acknowledge the points that were valid, and adjust your agument based on the new info.
Man I hate the quote system here wish it put the quotes in a box making it easier to see when it's a different poster speaking.
huh?
Isnt being silent mean i agree to the point made?
That's how it is with a speech
Post edited June 01, 2011 by iamin7ove
avatar
227: I killed Sile for the first time in my last playthrough. Felt so bad that I reloaded the save just to keep her alive.

There are just so many things unknown about her. Why does she wear such a strange, pointy hat all the time? What is that tattoo of? Does she like long walks on the beach?

These questions will be answered in Witcher 3, or else. Sure, she's kind of psychotic and tries to kill you with a dragon, but that kind of behavior is flirting when you do it to someone who hunts monsters. It's a classic "I only sic a dragon on you because I love you, baby," scenario.
I have let her go splat twice. However, I may let her live the next time.

I let Letho live both times, but did do a saved game to see if I could kick his butt. I did on the first try, so this settled whether my level 35 witcher was the better badass. But, then I reloaded and let him live. The actual killer was the royalty in Nilfgard; Letho was merely the blade they used. I felt that I had settled my debt to Roche by tracing the real culprit. And, darn it, he did save my women.
avatar
Sfon: Saved her. Didn't seem like she was going to explode anytime soon, and it fit my Geralt.

Sure, she was involved in killing a king, but that is just the way politics work there. Kings murder countless people in political games and have lots of luxury. Moral judgment aside, the price of that is they are a legitimate target. If they lose their head in it that is just part of the dangerous game they play.

In other words, she was just another politician to me. She called down a dragon, but the kings have no less blood on their hands so whatever. The official viewpoint is that only kings have the right to play these games. But that is because the kings determine the official viewpoint, and of course they are going to push that idea.
I agree i let her live in the end but i thought killing her was too easy. You whack a king no one will trust you, they will not stop looking for you. Run little girl seemed more like a fitting punishment. Living in fear on the run constantly, never knowing who to trust, sleeping with one eye open finally ending up on the table in some dank dungeon before they roast you alive, death would have been a mercy. AND sadly i was still hoping to be able to get some Sile' style loving even up to the very end, maybe not full on "pitch a tent coitus" with the limited time frame of a hasty escape but maybe some of the bent over the table quickie variety just so i can check the box and say "i tapped dat ass". Allowing her the chance to temporarily escape the dank hole she is destined for in exchange for some glory hole, seems like a fair exchange to me, what good is leverage if you will not apply it.

Asai